Mandatory Attendance in Legal Education: A Critical Study of Physical Presence, Meaningful Academic Engagement and Law Students' Rights in India

Abstract

Mandatory attendance is a settled feature of Indian legal education, intended to promote regular participation, academic discipline and professional competence. Yet, when examination eligibility and academic progression depend heavily on numerical attendance, a distinction arises between physical presence and meaningful academic engagement. This paper examines whether the existing attendance framework for law students genuinely advances learning or risks converting attendance into an end in itself. Its principal objectives are to analyse the statutory and constitutional basis of attendance requirements in legal education, to assess the proportionality of examination debarment for attendance shortage, and to evaluate whether experiential activities such as moot courts, internships, court visits, legal aid and research should receive greater academic recognition. The study adopts a doctrinal, analytical and limited comparative methodology, drawing upon the Constitution of India, the Advocates Act, the Bar Council of India Rules of Legal Education, 2008, university regulations, judicial decisions, policy materials and academic literature. Particular attention is given to Court on its Own Motion in Re: Suicide Committed by Sushant Rohilla, Law Student of I.P. University, the Delhi High Court's 2025 directions, the Supreme Court's subsequent interim orders, and later attendance litigation. The paper finds that a reasonable minimum attendance requirement is legitimate in a professional course, but automatic or inflexible exclusion from examinations may become disproportionate where alternative forms of engagement, exceptional circumstances, procedural fairness and institutional compliance are ignored. It argues for a flexible, outcome-oriented framework in which attendance remains relevant but is supplemented by experiential learning, transparent condonation, early warning, an opportunity of hearing, and graduated consequences. The study thereby seeks to reconcile professional standards with student welfare, autonomy and meaningful participation in contemporary legal education.